Legal Opinion

In Re the Disciplinary Proceeding Against Walgren

Washington Supreme Court

Decided October 17, 1985No. C.D. 4760Published

1DissentGoodloe, J.

(dissenting) — The majority holds that Gordon Walgren, subject to certain prerequisites and upon completion of his parole, may be reinstated as a member of the Washington State Bar. With this determination, I cannot agree.

I object because this court should not review a petition for reinstatement from a disbarred attorney still on parole and because a disbarred attorney, as a matter of law, cannot show rehabilitation until an adequate time has passed after completion of his parole.

No case was found where a court approved the reinstatement of a disbarred attorney while the disbarred attorney…

Also in this document: Concurrence.

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. United States v. John Bagnariol, United States of America v. Gordon L. Walgren, United States of America v. Patrick GallagherCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1981
  2. In Re EddlemanWashington Supreme Court · 1969
  3. In Re LonerganWashington Supreme Court · 1945
  4. In Re the Disciplinary Proceeding Against KroghWashington Supreme Court · 1980
  5. In Re Petition of SimmonsWashington Supreme Court · 1972

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API